CCBC-Net Archives
The Caldecott + Preparation
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Ginny Moore Kruse <gmkruse_at_wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 13:32:32 -0500
Reviewers can make a difference.
Committee m em bers who read reviews can reflect upon reviewers' insights in adv ance of making nominations an d deliberating in person during the final discussions . While studying books el i gible for an annual book aw ard prior to any book award committee meetings, it's helpful to me whenever I discover substantial reviews containing c onstructive criticism in addition to applause for excellence. L engthy plot summaries are less necessary than solid reason s as to why book is excellent - or average.
I d on't rely entirely upon reviews, but an in-dep th review can be inf luential during my pre paration.
A s a non-Latina member appointed to an early Pura Belpre Awards Committee, I prepared by engaging in local book discussions and by searching for published reviews. I especially tried to learn h ow each nominated book might measure up in terms of cultural authentic ity. All I found in the rev iews at that time were summari es and joyous expressions t hat this or that book had been published. Not useful. Not good enough for someone
preparing for any t ype of book award discussion.
On t
h e two Caldecott committees to which I've
been elected, we were aware that our collective de cisions would
become part of
children's literature history, have an impa ct upon book sales, affect library purchases, and influ ence family r eading.
We focuse d upon choosing the most distin guished illustration in a picture book published during the previ ous year by a U.S. publisher.
We could not u ndo
the decisio ns of previous committees. As
Norma Jean Sawicki pointed out, the
pool of books el igible for the award d uring any given year will determine what any committee
will examine, evaluate, nominate and discu ss.
R egardless of who we
were, and no matter what our life and work experiences were, we each held the same book in our hands as we prepared. W e tried to avoi d brin ging personal agendas to our deliberations and balloting.
We knew that others
outside of our committee would either cheer or criticize our selections and that the critical app raisals would never end . We used ALSC discussion and balloting procedures. O ur decisions were the best ones
at which we could arrive as a group.
Most of us were happy about the outcomes. I f not, we were usually satisfied by knowing that as committee members we did our best to pre pare for the process, participate in the del iberations, and vote with integ rity .
Peace,
Ginny
Ginny Moore Kruse
gmkruse_at_wisc.edu
Received on Fri 17 May 2013 01:32:32 PM CDT
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 13:32:32 -0500
Reviewers can make a difference.
Committee m em bers who read reviews can reflect upon reviewers' insights in adv ance of making nominations an d deliberating in person during the final discussions . While studying books el i gible for an annual book aw ard prior to any book award committee meetings, it's helpful to me whenever I discover substantial reviews containing c onstructive criticism in addition to applause for excellence. L engthy plot summaries are less necessary than solid reason s as to why book is excellent - or average.
I d on't rely entirely upon reviews, but an in-dep th review can be inf luential during my pre paration.
A s a non-Latina member appointed to an early Pura Belpre Awards Committee, I prepared by engaging in local book discussions and by searching for published reviews. I especially tried to learn h ow each nominated book might measure up in terms of cultural authentic ity. All I found in the rev iews at that time were summari es and joyous expressions t hat this or that book had been published. Not useful. Not good enough for someone
preparing for any t ype of book award discussion.
On t
h e two Caldecott committees to which I've
been elected, we were aware that our collective de cisions would
become part of
children's literature history, have an impa ct upon book sales, affect library purchases, and influ ence family r eading.
We focuse d upon choosing the most distin guished illustration in a picture book published during the previ ous year by a U.S. publisher.
We could not u ndo
the decisio ns of previous committees. As
Norma Jean Sawicki pointed out, the
pool of books el igible for the award d uring any given year will determine what any committee
will examine, evaluate, nominate and discu ss.
R egardless of who we
were, and no matter what our life and work experiences were, we each held the same book in our hands as we prepared. W e tried to avoi d brin ging personal agendas to our deliberations and balloting.
We knew that others
outside of our committee would either cheer or criticize our selections and that the critical app raisals would never end . We used ALSC discussion and balloting procedures. O ur decisions were the best ones
at which we could arrive as a group.
Most of us were happy about the outcomes. I f not, we were usually satisfied by knowing that as committee members we did our best to pre pare for the process, participate in the del iberations, and vote with integ rity .
Peace,
Ginny
Ginny Moore Kruse
gmkruse_at_wisc.edu
Received on Fri 17 May 2013 01:32:32 PM CDT
